ELECTION '96.

Clinton's Pre-emptive Strikes Boxing In Dole

May 21, 1996|By William Neikirk and Michael Tackett, Washington Bureau.

WASHINGTON — If Bob Dole issued a press release saying California was going to slide into the Pacific Ocean on Friday, President Clinton might immediately assign the Army Corps of Engineers to fix the San Andreas fault on Wednesday.

Such a hypothesis may satirize Clinton's political agility at seeking the advantage over his Republican rival, but it also underscores the rising frequency of gamesmanship during the presidential campaign.

In this campaign, Clinton has shown himself to be a master at the politics of pre-emption, the game incumbent presidents often play to outguess or outmaneuver their foes before they can claim credit or identify issues as their own.

Dole initially proposed to Clinton that the president join him in lowering the gasoline tax. But before Dole could introduce a repeal in Congress, the president rushed in with a plan to release oil from the federal government's reserves in a bid to push down prices. Later, Clinton said he would support the gas-tax repeal if Dole would agree to increase the minimum wage.

After the Wall Street Journal disclosed Friday that Dole was expected to make a speech on welfare reform Tuesday in Wisconsin, Clinton endorsed that state's welfare overhaul plan in his Saturday radio address.

He did so even though the plan contains provisions that were part of a congressional bill he vetoed and though Wisconsin's Republican governor, Tommy Thompson, is on Dole's list of possible running mates.

One Republican senator, John McCain of Arizona, called Clinton's move "shameless."

Dole described Clinton's welfare counterstrike and other moves as "petty theft" of Republican ideas, while the GOP moved in its television commercials to portray the president as untruthful on issues.

In an era of rapid-response politics, the president's maneuvering is nothing unusual. But some analysts warn he is playing a risky game that could damage his credibility.

"I think it's very dangerous ground for the president," said Democratic consultant Greg Schneiders. "It's all the more dangerous for him because it appears so successful for him in the short run. The larger danger is if it becomes a character issue."

Presidential scholar Fred Greenstein of Princeton University said many Americans don't pay attention to such jockeying. But he added that in Clinton's case it could have a downside because of "his vulnerability to the kinds of commercials" that question his credibility by juxtaposing seemingly conflicting statements.

A senior Dole campaign official indicated that the senator likely will try to turn Clinton's tactics, including endorsing the Wisconsin welfare plan, against the president.

"I think Clinton turned a very cynical corner," the official said. "It's just cynicism at its finest. And it goes right to the heart of the character issue. . . . The American voters are smart people, and his trying to co-opt the welfare issue is laughable."

But Kevin Phillips, a Republican political commentator, analyst and author, said Clinton has done an effective job of boxing Dole in on key issues. "You keep denying (Dole) traction for another two or three weeks, and it's difficult to see what he's going to latch onto."

Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank with ties to Clinton, said the president has "been successful up to now in pre-empting Dole across the wide spectrum of cultural and social issues that have been the soft underbelly of Democratic politics. He did that in 1992 and appears to be well on his way to doing it in 1996."

Marshall said Clinton is preventing Dole from "building up a head of steam in his critique of the president. Every time he launches a blast, the president occupies the same ground."

The president is trying to force Dole to take more extreme positions by co-opting his issues, he added.

James Thurber, political science professor at American University, said Clinton is only playing to his strengths.

"All presidents have the capacity and the resources to pre-empt their challengers," he said. "They have the power of the bully pulpit, the power of executive orders, the power to say things to get national exposure, to suggest proposals that may or may not become reality."

After initially having reservations about the balanced budget, Clinton now says he's an enthusiastic supporter, and is even ribbing the Republicans for not sending him one he can sign.

To the GOP's frustration, Clinton has aggressively painted himself as a law-and-order president and criticizes Republicans for undercutting his efforts to crack down on guns, gangs and drugs.

His opponents may suggest his tactics are cynical and insincere, Thurber said, but he added that presidents often find themselves in a position where they have to make moves on the basis of political expediency.

Still, the rise in political gamesmanship is one reason voters tell pollsters they are fed up with Washington.

Clinton has been called all kinds of political names for his capacity to switch positions.

If the president's moves are effectively criticized as transparently political, one Democratic operative said, "That plays into a Clinton weakness, which is that neither he nor his administration is guided by any fixed star or core principles. By itself it could become an issue if adroitly exploited by the Republicans."